Sherlock Holmes was only fiction, but he was portrayed by Doyle as a drug addict maniac in ways, a rampant problem of unregulated Victorian times as well as the Comstock Era in USA at the same time.

Hugely many people were a mess from the drugs freely available then. Sears offered a 3 dollars syringe kit for morphine and other drugs that became an epidemic problem of addicts who knew very well of the addiction problems.

It's only around 1917 when the first Harrison anti-drug law came into effect in USA because of the very serious problems of addictions becoming a problem back then.

fastfissionCherokee (3.8 mt)

Joined: Apr 14, 2007
Posts: 425
Location: Arzamas-16

Posted:
Tue Oct 30, 2007 2:09 am

The Harrison laws, the ludicrous Dr Wiley and the lying Anslinger were all driven by the Temperance movement and what we now know today as the Religious Right.

Up until 1927 the British had what was called the Rolleston system whereby doctor proscribed narcotics to addicts, who were mainly professionals getting high on their own supply. The number of registered heroin addicts at the time of abolition and defacto criminalisation was around 300.

There are now over 300,000.

The figures speak for themselves. For a superb history of prohibition in the 20th Century illustrating the influence of the Puritan Right in the US read
"The Pursuit of Oblivion: A Global History of Narcotics" by Richard Davenport-Hines, see review here:

There are hugely undocumented figures from California in the burroughs of larger western cities, for example. "Registered" also does not mean accurate data.

Fission also doesn't know or admit alot of history behind the antidrug movement from the 19th into the 20th centuries. ... Not even a hint of FAR more significant secular issues must be agreed upon here in order to bring forth the truth here.

Most of antidrug political movement was not a Christian movement, but an anti-immigration movement to slow people from what at the time was considered targeted nationals and ethnicities, such as Mexicans and Chinese, and more. These people were targeted for their many differences perceived then, and the persistent political aggression (i.e. for Mexicans ** up to the end of the First World War), driven through the drugs that they brought with them into the American West. I have various sources that depict this is a very strong light, even a documentary from the liberal PBS in documenting the hundred years anniversary of the great San Francisco earthquake, hilighting the times and the very deep racial and cultural divides at the time. The anticocaine and antiliquor battles were OVERWHELMINGLY driven by the southern whites objecting to Jim Crow Era blacks drinking and using cocaine to falsely boost confidence to rise up and dominate whites through violence. By this time some states were dominated by African-Americans.

I am not condoning racism, but merely stating the truth in context of what happened.

Please read the history more, and cease obsessing on the anti-Christian aspects of your personality that you lumped all into one pile so far. The truth of the political battles against drugs then is in secular and racial problems at the time, not religious.

"According to the federal Household Survey, "most current illicit drug users are white. There were an estimated 9.9 million whites (72 percent of all users), 2.0 million blacks (15 percent), and 1.4 million Hispanics (10 percent) who were current illicit drug users in 1998." And yet, blacks constitute 36.8% of those arrested for drug violations, over 42% of those in federal prisons for drug violations. African-Americans comprise almost 58% of those in state prisons for drug felonies; Hispanics account for 20.7%."

and

"Due to harsh new sentencing guidelines, such as 'three-strikes, you're out,' "a disproportionate number of young Black and Hispanic men are likely to be imprisoned for life under scenarios in which they are guilty of little more than a history of untreated addiction and several prior drug-related offenses... States will absorb the staggering cost of not only constructing additional prisons to accommodate increasing numbers of prisoners who will never be released but also warehousing them into old age."

Oh yes, that's the way to go.

Face facts. American (esp Republican) policy in this area is part of the the problem not part of the solution.

FF

GravitonYankee (13.5 mt)

Joined: Sep 03, 2006
Posts: 1615
Location: USA

Posted:
Tue Oct 30, 2007 6:06 pm

It's irrational to be so one-sided as you are, Fission.

You again falsely accuse Christians of being behind the anti-drug movement, when it's truly a rational reaction by people to avoid recreational drugs, outside of any religious category.

I can list many left wing to far left groups that were and are racist. Your mightier than thou attitude against Christians is not founded in reality except for left-wing sloganisms that are not grounded or balanced in reality. You take the worst examples of some racists and call them Christians, which is not rational.

Christianity is solely the recorded teachings of Jesus, according to New Testament, not what some institutional hierarchy spins of it.

There is also a big problem you have with separating religious people from
spiritualists who firmly believe in God (and the basic moral and behavioral principles Jesus is recorded to have taught) outside of the political influences and time-influenced institutional dogma. You also do not included humanists in your criticisms -- but be fully aware that atheists and agnostics are just as prone to believing and pushing dogma of "the unseen," going as irrationally far as to repeatedly make cult demigods of leaders like Lenin, Stalin, Mao and Ceaucescu, among others. Even communist dictator Ceaucescu's wife was in on the game.

You just can't call yourself rational with the idea of putting hope solely in line with humanists who are bound to fail by putting too much faith in human elites. True patriots of freedoms believe in moderacy and differences of thinking that call into question other ideas for promoting debate that avoid the trap of even larger groupthinks that are very dangerous. Moderately religious people are excellent for avoiding the traps of humanists (such as communists, fascists, and socialists), and moderately humanists people are important for avoiding the trap of hardened religiousity.

The basic point is that it is both practical and important to have moderate differences in people, since the reality is that all masses of people believe in the unseen in different ways, whether it's religious or not.

fastfissionCherokee (3.8 mt)

Joined: Apr 14, 2007
Posts: 425
Location: Arzamas-16

Posted:
Sun Jan 20, 2008 4:20 am

At last the Dutch look finally set to challenge and reform the outdated UN convention that criminalises 170 million hash and grass smokers worldwide and which fuels global organised crime via the insanity of the present illegal market:

At last the Dutch look finally set to challenge and reform the outdated UN convention that criminalises 170 million hash and grass smokers worldwide and which fuels global organised crime via the insanity of the present illegal market:

Well somebody has to control the distribution network. Better the Dutch military than the Colombian FARC Marxist militia or Al-Qaeda surely?

The Laws of Supply and Demand are immutable. With a global customer base of 170 Million for this one substance alone, clearly there will always be demand and there always be supply, licit or no.

What is your alternative? Lock up all 170 Million consumers worldwide?

Do you really, really believe that is either realistic or desirable?

Cannabis is a commodity just like alcohol and tobacco, except much less harmful. It is time to end the insanity of US imposed Prohibition. It didnt work with alcohol, as your country found to its cost, and it does not work with drugs.

The prohibitionists have no logic to their rants at all; the Emperor wears no clothes and everyone can see it except the present US Government and it sycophants.

Wake up America.

FF

GravitonYankee (13.5 mt)

Joined: Sep 03, 2006
Posts: 1615
Location: USA

Posted:
Sun Jan 20, 2008 5:02 pm

Fission, that is nonsense again, and nothing new. Yet I should remind the broader group of what you fail to grasp as fundamentals beyond all these misleading figures that are only meant to lower others standards down to your own vision of a drugs-complacent world.

1. Common sense about Dutch military and : they are BOTH criminal groups.

2. Pro-drug legalization doesn't have common sense at a personal level in what drug culture does to attack higher culture of civilization. Fission hides behind numbers in the same way porn is trying to become mainstream even though it deeply attacks human dignity and involves participants with deep moral and personal problems . People who can't figure this out just can't be helped or need a rude awakening.

3. Rightful people don't give up on fighting crime and idiot vices like drugs just because crime will always exist in many, often violent ways.

4. I am in the intellectual community. I won't have my career or personal traits threatened by passive, poisonous to the mind, weed smoke invading my airways that can cause me involuntarily to fail a random drug test as well.

Are most people too stupid to realize that drugs make much lesser of people and drive much less moral compass? There is no other way around these facts at a personal level.

Socialism (rife in European and Latin countries around the world) also protects bureaucratic crime. Socialism of Europe also loves stupid followers who listen to a few elites telling everyone else how to tapdance.

Fission obviously wants the world to be idiots with drug culture, idiots that become much less effective in daily life.

So the emperor has no clothes? In a figurative sense, try to correct your own dirty underwear problem first, before you impose low, low standards on Western civilization.

fastfissionCherokee (3.8 mt)

Joined: Apr 14, 2007
Posts: 425
Location: Arzamas-16

Posted:
Sun Jan 20, 2008 6:18 pm

Well clearly we will never agree on this.

You seek to impose your own choices on others of what you think is acceptable and what you think is not in terms of pleasure and leisure and are quite happy to lock up anyone who disagrees with your choices.

Your logic has more in common with the Spanish Inquisition than the "moderacy" you constantly preach and if you cannot see the innate contradiction in your position then I cannot help you further.

FF

GravitonYankee (13.5 mt)

Joined: Sep 03, 2006
Posts: 1615
Location: USA

Posted:
Sun Jan 20, 2008 9:55 pm

fastfission wrote:

Well clearly we will never agree on this.

You seek to impose your own choices on others of what you think is acceptable and what you think is not in terms of pleasure and leisure and are quite happy to lock up anyone who disagrees with your choices.

Your logic has more in common with the Spanish Inquisition than the "moderacy" you constantly preach and if you cannot see the innate contradiction in your position then I cannot help you further.

FF

I accept the reality of how drugs hurt people on a personal level, no matter what the cost in budgets, which totally annihilates any of my support for legalized drugs.

Yes, I am far more moderate than you are in the balance of moderacy being aware that drugs IN REALITY:

1. ruin higher culture.

2. drive people to become less productive in their lives.

3. impose on others through lack of respect for what second hand smoke does to others.

4. cost more in medical burdens on society that legalized marijuana would otherwise escalate.

5. impose on others in ruining their ability to pass a drug test because of passive smoke passing through a building.

6. feed socialist ideals in a dumbing down of society to where a few elites tell everyone what to do. The EU is a formal cultural model pushing in this direction.

7. instill a false reality in replacing coping with reality, with the delusions of drug influences.

8. ignores the reality of the 1800s' lack of legal controls that saw an explosive outbreak of terrible suffering in the rise of drug culture. YES, there is precedent in the legal status of drugs causing escalated damages to civilization.

Also consider that China had ruinous problems with legalized drugs for centuries, and that Mao saw at least some reality in his harshly attacking free drug use and trade. Yes, some deeply anti-Christian leaders as well see the stupidity of drug culture when it is totally out of control due to earlier legalization. You can read about this graven Chinese problem in Pearl S. Buck's The Good Earth.

Anyone who supports drugs has obviously never been to a country where it is free and a raging problem. In Africa it's obvious how drugs mess up society. South Asia also has a heroin, hashish, and bhahng mess. Ever wonder why Afghani fighters fight so fiercely yet get whacked stupidly by the dozens in fighting once they are discovered? The chew bhahng weed during combat. Every wonder about what is also in common with hugely many suicide bombers? They chew bhahng weed or take other drugs while making the attacks. Crazy people.

fastfissionCherokee (3.8 mt)

Joined: Apr 14, 2007
Posts: 425
Location: Arzamas-16

Posted:
Thu Jan 24, 2008 3:57 am

Crappy third world countries will be be crappy third world countries, drugs or no. Everyone in the West who wants to get stoned or get high is getting stoned or high. Supply is not a problem. It's the people doing the supplying who are the problem and the fact these commodities are not regulated, taxed and licenced like their far more destructive cousin, the C2H5OH molecule.

As for so-called passive smoking? Smoke going through buildings?

Hello?

Earth calling.

What Lefty dogma are you buying into now? There is not a jot of evidence to suggest passive smoking of anything (grass or tobacco) affects anyone at all. This is all BS put out by the health fascists to justify their telling other people what to do. It's even more BS than man made climate change.

This is rot from within, drug use, and it hurts people using recreational drugs at a personal level, whether they admit it or not. There are no exceptions.

You also are not realistic in what free drugs do to societies which you, FF, UNREALISTICALLY and contemptively brush off as "crappy" countries. Drugs and other lack of self-control, among other fundamental rots of society from within, lead to growth of more crappy places, including inside the UK and USA.

FF, I am leading the cause of sensibility and far clearer minds, not all this nonsense that you buzzword with incorrectly placed fascist labels. Drugs attack the heart of freedoms as well, since drug people put the desires of lowlife self-poisoning above the well-being and health of individuals. Drug users are messed up because of even casual drug use ... it changes people for the worse.

Yes, drugs like pot do invade other lives, and they have done it in with passive poison smoke flow down the hallways of buildings or along coffee shops in the walking malls. I am equally outraged at cigarettes, and applaud the public ban on cigarettes in this city in public buildings.

fastfissionCherokee (3.8 mt)

Joined: Apr 14, 2007
Posts: 425
Location: Arzamas-16

Posted:
Thu Jan 24, 2008 10:38 am

Grav, you just want to tell other people what to do. You failed to respond to my pulling you up about the myth of passive smoking; you just bought into this lie because it is convenient to your world view. Just like the Red Greens / Green Misanthropists and the global warming myth. I see no difference between them and you.

As I said, clearly we will never agree on this. You cannot respect other people's choices and you believe your choices should be the same for all.

View next topicView previous topic
You cannot post new topics in this forumYou cannot reply to topics in this forumYou cannot edit your posts in this forumYou cannot delete your posts in this forumYou cannot vote in polls in this forum